A change in supply chain partners has fueled concerns that Tesla may be struggling to meet stationary energy-storage delivery commitments.

Last week, the Nikkei Asian Review reported that Tesla had turned to Samsung SDI, instead of its usual cell supplier Panasonic, to provide the batteries needed for its most high-profile project to date, a 100-megawatt, 129-megawatt-hour battery plant in South Australia.

“The decision to use Samsung SDI is a blow to Panasonic, which has its hands full with orders for electric-vehicle batteries,” said Nikkei Asian Review.

“To meet a self-imposed deadline of 100 days, Tesla turned to the South Korean company since it could swiftly supply the cells. Tesla is importing the cells to the U.S. for final assembly before sending them to Australia -- apparently taking the promotional benefits over profit," the article states.

Under a deal struck by Tesla boss Elon Musk, if Tesla does not complete the South Australian project within 100 days of the grid-connection agreement, then Australia gets it for free.

The clock officially began ticking on Friday, Sept. 29, when a grid connection agreement was inked with transmission company Electranet.

At the same time, Tesla seized upon a PR opportunity to pack what Bloomberg said were “hundreds” of batteries off to Puerto Rico in the wake of the devastation left by Hurricane Maria.

One aerial photo of the destruction showed a sign that said “SEND TESLA,” spelled out with the debris from a hurricane-smashed home.

Responding to these high-profile opportunities has undoubtedly helped Tesla further increase its standing as the most famous energy storage brand on earth. But it has also put intense pressure on Tesla’s supply chain, many experts believe.

The change in suppliers for the South Australian project “would point to a supply issue of some kind,” an Australian energy insider told GTM.

“If the [Tesla] Gigafactory is focused on the South Australia 100-megawatt battery [plant], that might have consequences for other products," the source said. "The feeling locally is that this would push the cost of the project up significantly.”

Some observers also believe a supply bottleneck might force Tesla to prioritize headline-grabbing project deliveries over other orders.

According to Tesla, orders are fulfilled on a first-come, first-served basis, and each customer is given an estimated delivery or installation time when they place their order. New Powerwall orders will not be fulfilled until the first quarter of next year, though.

And elsewhere there are signs that rank-and-file Powerwall customers are facing long delivery delays.

Speaking in a podcast with Australia’s RenewEconomy last month, Australian solar industry veteran Nigel Morris said: “There are a lot of people who have placed orders for Powerwall 2s. They aren’t available at the moment. There’s no stock coming into the country.”

“Due to limited shipments, Tesla is prioritizing deliveries to preferred partners and high-profile contracts and markets," said Ravi Manghani, energy storage director at GTM Research. "Tesla is really pushing to establish dominance in Australia, for instance.”

It may be doing so at the expense of other markets, he said. In the U.S., meanwhile, some solar installers have expressed concern that Tesla may face a conflict with independent channel partners after having taken over SolarCity.

“The Powerwall is a cool product. There is a lot of interest in it. But the fact that it’s being installed by SolarCity is a classic case of channel conflict," said Barry Cinnamon, CEO of San Francisco-based Spice Solar.

“It makes rational business sense [for Tesla] to divert inventory to their own installation company so they can make more revenue," he said.

Installers, including Spice Solar, which does not stock Powerwalls, owes Tesla a debt of gratitude for having popularized energy storage, he said. But, Cinnamon added: “I’m aware of a lot of contractors who signed up to sell it and a lot who are still waiting for equipment.”

Perhaps because of looming product shortages, Tesla appears to be raising the bar for independent contractors wanting to install its Powerwalls. Anecdotally, some installers claim to have been stonewalled by Tesla, forcing them to choose alternative battery suppliers.

Analysts were not able to confirm this. But Manghani has heard there are currently just "a handful" of certified electrical contractors that Tesla will allow to install these systems.

Join GTM for a deep dive into the budding domestic energy storage market at the U.S. Energy Storage Summit 2017. Utilities, financiers, regulators, technology innovators, and storage practitioners will all come together for two full days of data-intensive presentations, analyst-led panel sessions with industry leaders, and extensive, high-level networking. Learn more here.

1,000 and still growing at a rapid rate. The Tesla Supercharger network has reached a milestone of 1,000 stations installed around the world since late 2012, when the first few were opened in California.

Tesla’s new Urban Supercharger

Supercharge.info, a site that tracks all of the Tesla Superchargers, lists the following data:

Tesla recently closed the books on the third quarter of 2017, which turned out to be the best result in its history.

However, the result was considered as a miss of sorts, as those gains weren’t aided in a significant way by the new Model 3; production of the inexpensive EV finished Q3 at just 260 units(as opposed to the ~1,630+ forecast by the CEO a couple months ago).

Tesla Model S

During the quarter, Tesla estimated it delivered 26,150 EVs; which although being a new record level, was just 4.5% better than a year ago.

If one notes the deliveries on the chart (above), it is easy to spot Q3 as the lowest year-over-year gain for the company since the Model S’ introduction in 2012.

As noted, the main problem was the reliance on the Tesla Model 3 to take growth forward (as the Model S and X are clearly nearing their peak sales potential). The company did note some “production bottlenecks” during the quarter, slowing down results.

“Model 3 production was less than anticipated due to production bottlenecks. Although the vast majority of manufacturing subsystems at both our California car plant and our Nevada Gigafactory are able to operate at high rate, a handful have taken longer to activate than expected.”

Production and sales results from now on should grow significantly for subsequent quarters, as the scale of the Model 3 is expected to be at least few times higher than S and X combined – up to a run-rate of 5,000 per week by year’s end.

Tesla Model 3 was held back by a “manufacturing bottleneck” in Q3

Of the production issues that plagued the model recently, Tesla says they have it under control…more or less.

“It is important to emphasize that there are no fundamental issues with the Model 3 production or supply chain. We understand what needs to be fixed and we are confident of addressing the manufacturing bottleneck issues in the near-term.”

With 26,150 Model S, Model X and Model 3 (220 total) sales in Q3, Tesla also crossed the all-time mark of 250,000 total deliveries during the quarter – nearly 257,000 without counting the 2,500 Roadsters.

With 100,000 deliveries forecast by the company for 2017, the milestone of 300,000 should be achieved in Q1’2018.

According to our reports, the bulk of Tesla sales have been in the US (both since 2012 and in Q3’2017) – at more than 55% of the total, or ~144,664 deliveries (excluding Roadsters).

This is an important number for US consumers, as the $7,500 federal credit begins to sunset 3-6 months after EV #200,000 is delivered in the US; which at this point looks like Q1 of 2018 – meaning that the $7,500 credit will drop to $3,750 on July 1st, 2018 (through the end of the year).

It seems Morgan Stanley gets more bullish regarding Tesla on a daily basis.

This may come as no surprise to some since the electric automaker’s stock has risen a whopping 63 percent thus far this year. Morgan Stanley analyst, Adam Jonas, has gone so far as to say that there could be some 32 million Tesla vehicles on the road globally by 2040.

At this point, it’s still somewhat rare for most people to see a Tesla on their daily drive. This is especially true if they live outside of areas like California or other CARB states, or major foreign markets like Norway.

If Jonas is even close to correct with his recent estimates, the company is soon to become a household name.

Image Credit: Morgan Stanley Research via Bloomberg

According to Bloomberg, Adam Jonas, head of automotive research at Morgan Stanley, wrote in a note to clients:

“With the launch of the Model 3, we forecast the Tesla car population to multiply three times by the end of 2019. It has been generations since the investment community witnessed such a high growth rate in the population of a single auto firm.”

They make look sleek, but it’s what’s inside that really counts, says a new Tesla bull. Photo: Tesla

Tesla may be competing with car companies to sell electric vehicles, but the company has more in common with technology firms like Intel, argues Instinet analyst Romit Shah.

Shah is the newest analyst covering Tesla and he released a report on Wednesday predicting that the stock could soar to $500, or 46% above its Tuesday closing price.

Shah’s background is in computer chips, which he says gives him a special insight into Tesla’s business. Intel, Shah notes, became the dominant chip provider because it figured out how to add multiple functions onto a single chip and then take control of the entire process of making and marketing those chips. Over the years its products got more and more efficient, and it grabbed more and more market share.

Similarly, Tesla will dominate the electric vehicle market by controlling and perfecting every aspect of vehicle production, Shah argues. That starts with batteries, which Tesla produces at its “gigafactory” in Nevada.

“The Model 3 costs $140 per mile of range (versus competitors at $235 per mile) and we believe that Tesla is on track to reduce this to under $115 per mile by 2020,” Shah wrote.

Shah’s $500 price target is based on comparing Tesla, in part, to other technology companies. That may be why he’s an outlier among Wall Street analysts. As seen in the chart below, analysts have actually become relatively bearish on Tesla stock as the stock has risen. Their average price target is $313, according to FactSet, below Wednesday’s closing price of $355.01. The average target price fell below the stock’s price toward the start of this year, as some analysts questioned whether Tesla could hit its ambitious production targets for the Model 3.

This year, Tesla’s stock price has surged 66%. And buying shares in Elon Musk’s company is far from the only way to cash in on the future of electric cars.

Investors are sending the prices of the raw materials used to make lithium-ion batteries rapidly higher on hopes that demand for electric cars surges. The rise comes amid fears that the supply of the metals needed for batteries might not meet the new demand.

Volkswagen, the world’s largest carmaker, said this year that it expects to need 200 GWh of battery-cell production by 2025 and plans to invest €20 billion ($23.4 billon) in zero-emissions vehicles. This would require a huge increase in production because there is only 266 GWh of new battery capacity in the worldwide pipeline between now and 2020, according to Benchmark Mineral Intelligence.

Government environmental initiatives are likely to increase demand. The UK and France are banning the sale of new petrol and diesel cars by 2040 and China says that 10% of cars it produces by 2019 must be zero-emissions. There’s huge room for growth, too: electric vehicles account for six of the ten fastest-selling used car models in the US, where they make up just 1% of total new sales.